What I would like to know is at what point does proto-language (like basic sounds the way animals comunicate) actually become language. Is it the point when multi-syllabic words develop? Is it the point when grammar become important (like stringing together a noun and a verb?)
2006-06-22 17:17:20 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science ➔ Anthropology
please avoid wikipedia and the ilk
2006-06-22 17:18:03 · update #1
lanaguage is a system of signs (Soussur)
2006-06-29 15:56:32 · answer #1 · answered by mc 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Proto-language is NOT 'basic sounds the way animals communicate'. Proto-language is a part of a theory - which most linguists consider plausible but which nevertheless still speculative - that all human languages are derived from a single common source. Linguists have attempted to reconstruct elements of this 'proto-language' based on attested common elements of languages.
It is a comon fallacy that an 'old' language must be 'primitive'. There is no reason to believe that Proto-Language (or individual proto-languages such as Proto Indo European (PIE)) were less grammatically complex, less subtle, less expressive or capable of expressing fewer meanings etc. than any modern language.
Obviously, at some point between there being no language and language emerging, there must have been some intermediate stage, and I make no pretence at being able to answer this question. However, this intermediate stage is not referred to as proto-language.
Your suggestion of multi-syllabic words would not work. Many languages (e.g. Chinese, Thai) are basically monosyllabic in structure - with polysyllabic loan words. Grammar would be important, of course. Linguists use the term 'grammar' to refer to all the rules of a language which make it meaningful and not in the narrower sense of 'word agreement within sentences' that we use in everyday speech. Without any rules - phonological, syntactical, morphological etc. - no language could be meaningful.
2006-06-28 15:07:25 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
A long time ago I thought that love was something that you reserved for some special set of people that you had judged worthy of it. After a while I got to thinking about what Jesus had said about turning the other cheek and loving our neighbor I put the two together and realized that he had made no exceptions in these statements. It became obvious to me that he intended that we exclude no one from the love that we are supposed to be giving. I started thinking about my idea of love and suddenly realized that I had not been loving anyone at all. I had simply been judging everyone and every thing. Judging someone worthy of love is not love, it is only judgment. I actually started to cry when I realized this. I saw just how much of my life I had wasted being judgmental, thinking of myself as a Christian, when I was actually doing just the opposite of what Jesus had asked us to do. I thought about the verse judge not lest ye be judged, and I understood it for the first time. I realized that I have a lot of catching up to do. So many opportunities were wasted. I now try to apply the love that I have for the world in a universal way like Jesus asks us to do. If I start to feel afraid and think that I see someone that I should not love because of something I have thought or heard I try to catch my mistake as soon as possible. I tell myself that I have forgot the truth and have fallen for the same old trick that had cost me so many opportunities to be loving in the past. The horror of this realization is often all that is necessary to bring me back to my senses and make me drop the judgmental nonsense I was thinking. I still have a lot to learn about love, but at least I’m making progress. Love and blessings Your brother Don
2016-05-20 12:50:50 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Language also developed when social groups had to interact such as in hunting. They had to be able to make plans.
Generally it is assumed that animals cannot comprehend future and plan for it, so that even if they can communicate important information, that is not considered language.
2006-06-27 20:39:25 · answer #4 · answered by lrad1952 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Language can be defined as the moment when sounds or words carry symbolic meaning and have cultural analogues to them. When words mean multiple things or are symbols used to refer to real events, or objects in a given environment, i.e. "I" or "eye" refer to real things but the words themselves wether spoken or written are symbolic of the real thing this is language.
2006-06-24 12:59:27 · answer #5 · answered by Rawboy 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
words that pass through many many generations... eventually it becomes a part of culture. Grammer is just some ideas that some guy who he thinks his way is the best way... like elbows on the dinner table.. not many eople care... but some one way back that thier way was the best way and thought thats how is should be done
2006-06-22 17:49:17 · answer #6 · answered by Tasteslikekittylitter 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you can utter any thing that has a definite meaning to another then it is a language
2006-06-22 20:00:05 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋